Australian federal politicians from across the political spectrum have jointly asked the US attorney general, Merrick Garland, to abandon attempts to extradite Julian Assange from the UK.

The 48 MPs and senators including 13 from the governing Labor party warned that the pursuit of the WikiLeaks founder set a dangerous precedent for press freedom and would damage the reputation of the US.

Assange, an Australian citizen, remains in Belmarsh prison in London as he fights a US attempt to extradite him to face charges in connection with the publication of hundreds of thousands of leaked documents about the Afghanistan and Iraq wars as well as diplomatic cables.

In an open letter published on Tuesday, the Labor, Coalition, Greens and crossbench politicians implored Garland to drop the extradition proceedings and allow Mr Assange to return home.

If the extradition request is approved, Australians will witness the deportation of one of our citizens from one Aukus partner to another our closest strategic ally with Mr Assange facing the prospect of spending the rest of his life in prison, the letter said.

This would set a dangerous precedent for all global citizens, journalists, publishers, media organizations and the freedom of the press. It would also be needlessly damaging for the US as a world leader on freedom of expression and the rule of law.

The letter said the charges which include 17 counts under the Espionage Act and one count under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act pertained to Assanges actions as a journalist and publisher in publishing information with evidence of war crimes, corruption and human rights abuses.

The MPs and senators contrasted the ongoing pursuit of Assange with the case of the former US army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning, who was released in 2017 when Barack Obama commuted her 35-year military prison sentence for leaking the information.

The letter said Assange who initially took refuge in the Ecuadorian embassy in London has been effectively incarcerated for well over a decade in one form or another, yet the person who leaked classified information had their sentence commuted and has been able to participate in American society since 2017.

The independent MP Andrew Wilkie, who co-chairs the Parliamentary Friends of Julian Assange Group, initiated the letter. It coincides with the fourth anniversary of Assange being detained in Belmarsh prison.

Wilkie said the 48 Australian federal parliamentarians were acting in concert with similar letters from parliamentarians from around the world and together they represented millions of constituents.

This is no small matter and must not be dismissed, Wilkie said. Nor should it be ignored that the outpouring of political concern spans the political spectrum and is based on a diverse range of reasons.

Assanges father, John Shipton, said his son had been living under a pall of shame and disgrace.

Shipton said the decision by the new Australian high commissioner to the UK, Stephen Smith, to visit Belmarsh prison last week marked the beginning of the end of this bleak, severe frost on truth and destruction of Julian Assange.

Greg Barns SC, a legal adviser to the Assange campaign, said the US attempt to prosecute Assange was dangerous because it meant any journalist or publisher anywhere in the world could face extradition to the US for exposing material Washington doesnt want you to know about.

The Australian foreign affairs minister, Penny Wong, warned late last month that there were limits to what diplomacy could achieve.

But she said Australia would continue to express the view to both the US and UK governments that the case against Assange has dragged on long enough and should be brought to a close.

The 13 Labor MPs to sign Tuesdays letter were Michelle Ananda-Rajah, Mike Freelander, Julian Hill, Peter Khalil, Tania Lawrence, Zaneta Mascarenhas, Brian Mitchell, Alicia Payne, Graham Perrett, Susan Templeman, Maria Vamvakinou, Josh Wilson and Tony Zappia.

The highest profile Coalition signatories were the former deputy prime minister Barnaby Joyce and the MP for Bass, Bridget Archer.

The Greens leader, Adam Bandt, was joined by many of his party colleagues in signing it, while independent MPs and senators were also well represented.

Comment was sought from the US embassy in Canberra, but the White House has previously said Joe Biden was committed to an independent Department of Justice when asked about the Assange case.

Read the original:

Dozens of Australian politicians urge US to abandon Julian Assange ...

Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., is circulating a letter among her House colleagues that calls on the Department of Justice to drop charges against Julian Assange and end its effort to extradite him from his detention in Belmarsh prison in the United Kingdom.

The letter, a copy of which was obtained by The Intercept, is still in the signature-gathering phase and has yet to be sent to Attorney General Merrick Garland.

The Justice Department has charged Assange, the publisher of WikiLeaks, for publishing classified information. The Obama administration had previously decided not to prosecute Assange, concerned with what was dubbed internally as the New York Times problem. The Times had partnered with Assange when it came to publishing classified information and itself routinely publishes classified information. Publishing classified information is a violation of the Espionage Act, though it has never been challenged in the Supreme Court, and constitutional experts broadly consider that element of the law to be unconstitutional.

The Espionage Act, as its written, has always been applicable to such a broad range of discussion of important matters, many of which have been wrongly kept secret for a long time, that it should be regarded as unconstitutional, explained Daniel Ellsberg, the famed civil liberties advocate who leaked the Pentagon Papers.

The Obama administration could not find a way to charge Assange without also implicating standard journalistic practices. The Trump administration, unburdened by such concerns around press freedom, pushed ahead with the indictment and extradition request. The Biden administration, driven by the zealous prosecutor Gordon Kromberg, has aggressively pursued Trumps prosecution. Assange won a reprieve from extradition in a lower British court but lost at the High Court. He is appealing there as well as to the European Court of Human Rights. Assanges brother, Gabriel Shipton, who has been campaigning globally for his release, said that Assanges mental and physical health have deteriorated in the face of the conditions he faces at Belmarsh.

Tlaib noted that the Times, The Guardian, El Pas, Le Monde, and Der Spiegel had put out a joint statement condemning the charges, and alluded to the same problem that gave the Obama administration pause. The prosecution of Mr. Assange, if successful, not only sets a legal precedent whereby journalists or publishers can be prosecuted, but a political one as well, she wrote. In the future, the New York Times or Washington Post could be prosecuted when they publish important stories based on classified information. Or, just as dangerous, they may refrain from publishing such stories for fear of prosecution.

So far, the letter has collected signatures from Democratic Reps. Jamaal Bowman, Ilhan Omar, and Cori Bush. Rep. Ro Khanna said he had yet to see the letter but added that he has previously said Assange should not be prosecuted because the charges are over-broad and a threat to press freedom. Rep. Pramila Jayapal is not listed as a signeebut told a Seattle audience recently she believes the charges should be dropped. A spokesperson for Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said thatshe intends to sign before the letter closes.

Chip Gibbons, policy director for Defending Rights & Dissent, said that the relative silence from Congress on the Assange prosecution has undermined U.S. claims to be defending democracy abroad. In spite of the rhetoric about opposing authoritarianism and defending democracy and press freedom, we really havent seen a comparable outcry from Congress until now, said Gibbons, whose organization has launched a petition calling on the Justice Department to drop charges. Rep. Tlaibs letter isnt just a breath of fresh air, its extremely important for members of Congress to be raising their voices on this, especially those from the same party of the current administration, at this critical juncture in a case that will determine the future of press freedom in the United States.

A significant number of Democrats continue to hold a hostile view of Assange, accusing him of publishing material that was purloined by Russian agents from the inbox of Hillary Clinton campaign chair John Podesta. The indictment, however, relates to his publication of government secrets leaked by Chelsea Manning more than a decade ago. In July 2010, WikiLeaks published approximately 75,000 significant activity reports related to the war in Afghanistan, classified up to the SECRET level, illegally provided to WikiLeaks by Manning, the indictment reads. In November 2010, WikiLeaks started publishing redacted versions of U.S. State Department cables, classified up to the SECRET level, illegally provided to WikiLeaks by Manning.

The U.S. government has made the general claim that Assanges publication of classified information put sources and allies of the U.S. in harms way, though the government has been unable to provide any example of that. Meanwhile, the U.S. government itself has left thousands of Afghan civilians, who collaborated with theU.S., to their fates after the withdrawal from Afghanistan, raising questions about the sincerity of their lamentations over the security of those who work with theU.S.

The word publish appears more than two dozen times in the superseding indictment of Assange, in which he is accused of having unauthorized possession of significant activity reports, classified up to the SECRET level [and] publishing them and causing them to be published on the Internet.

The full letter is below.

Dear Colleague:

Id like to invite you to join me in writing the Dept. of Justice to call on them to drop the Trump-era charges against Australian publisher Julian Assange.

I know many of us have very strong feelings about Mr. Assange, but what we think of him and his actions is really besides the point here. The fact of the matter is that the in which Mr. Assange is being prosecuted under the notoriously undemocratic Espionage Act seriously undermines freedom of the press and the First Amendment.

Defendants charged under the Espionage Act are effectively incapable of defending themselves and often are not allowed access to all the evidence being brought against them, or even to testify to the motivation behind their actions. The information that Mr. Assange worked with major media outlets like the New York Times and the Guardian to publish primarily came from the documents leaked by whistleblower Chelsea Manning. These documents exposed a number of extremely serious government abuses including torture, war crimes, and illegal mass surveillance.

Mr. Assanges prosecution marks the first time in US history that the Espionage Act has been used to indict a publisher of truthful information. The prosecution of Mr. Assange, if successful, not only sets a legal precedent whereby journalists or publishers can be prosecuted, but a political one as well. In the future, the New York Times or Washington Post could be prosecuted when they publish important stories based on classified information. Or, just as dangerous, they may refrain from publishing such stories for fear of prosecution.

The New York Times, The Guardian, El Pais, Le Monde, and Der Spiegel have taken the extraordinary step of publishing a joint statement in opposition to the indictment, warning that it sets a dangerous precedent, and threatens to undermine Americas First Amendment and the freedom of the press. They are joined in their opposition to Mr. Assanges prosecution by groups like the ACLU, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Reporters Without Borders and the Committee to Protect Journalists. Numerous foreign leaders have also expressed their concern and opposition, including Australian PM Albanese, Mexican President AMLO, Brazilian President Lula da Silva, and parliamentarians from numerous countries including the UK, Germany, Brazil, and Australia.

If you have any questions or would like to sign on to this letter, please contact Rep. Tlaibs Policy Advisor Andrew Myslik at [emailprotected] Thank you for your partnership in defending the freedom of the press and the First Amendment.

Sincerely,

Rashida TlaibMember of Congress

Dear Attorney General Merrick Garland,

We write you today to call on you to uphold the First Amendments protections for the freedom of the press by dropping the criminal charges against Australian publisher Julian Assange and withdrawing the American extradition request currently pending with the British government.

Press freedom, civil liberty, and human rights groups have been emphatic that the charges against Mr. Assange pose a grave and unprecedented threat to everyday, constitutionally protected journalistic activity, and that a conviction would represent a landmark setback for the First Amendment. Major media outlets are in agreement: The New York Times, The Guardian, El Pais, Le Monde, and Der Spiegel have taken the extraordinary step of publishing a joint statement in opposition to the indictment, warning that it sets a dangerous precedent, and threatens to undermine Americas First Amendment and the freedom of the press.

The ACLU, Amnesty International, Reporters Without Borders, the Committee to Protect Journalists, Defending Rights and Dissent, and Human Rights Watch, among others, have written to you three times to express these concerns. In one such letter they wrote:

The indictment of Mr. Assange threatens press freedom because much of the conduct described in the indictment is conduct that journalists engage in routinelyand that they must engage in in order to do the work the public needs them to do. Journalists at major news publications regularly speak with sources, ask for clarification or more documentation, and receive and publish documents the government considers secret. In our view, such a precedent in this case could effectively criminalize these common journalistic practices.

The prosecution of Julian Assange for carrying out journalistic activities greatly diminishes Americas credibility as a defender of these values, undermining the United States moral standing on the world stage, and effectively granting cover to authoritarian governments who can (and do) point to Assanges prosecution to reject evidence-based criticisms of their human rights records and as a precedent that justifies the criminalization of reporting on their activities. Leaders of democracies, major international bodies, and parliamentarians around the globe stand opposed to the prosecution of Assange. Former United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture Nils Melzer and the Council of Europes Commissioner for Human Rights Dunja Mijatovic have both opposed the extradition. Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has called on the U.S. government to end its pursuit of Assange. Leaders of nearly every major Latin American nation, including Mexican President Andrs Manuel Lpez Obrador, Brazilian President Luiz Incio Lula da Silva, and Argentinian President Alberto Fernndez have called for the charges to be dropped. Parliamentarians from around the world, including the United Kingdom, Germany, and Australia, have all called for Assange not to be extradited to the U.S.

This global outcry against the U.S. governments prosecution of Mr. Assange has highlighted conflicts between Americas stated values of press freedom and its pursuit of Mr. Assange. The Guardian wrote The US has this week proclaimed itself the beacon of democracy in an increasingly authoritarian world. If Mr. Biden is serious about protecting the ability of the media to hold governments accountable, he should begin by dropping the charges brought against Mr. Assange. Similarly, the Sydney Morning Herald editorial board stated, At a time when US President Joe Biden has just held a summit for democracy, it seems contradictory to go to such lengths to win a case that, if it succeeds, will limit freedom of speech.

As Attorney General, you have rightly championed freedom of the press and the rule of law in the United States and around the world. Just this past October the Justice Department under your leadership made changes to news media policy guidelines that generally prevent federal prosecutors from using subpoenas or other investigative tools against journalists who possess and publish classified information used in news gathering. We are grateful for these pro-press freedom revisions, and feel strongly that dropping the Justice Departments indictment against Mr. Assange and halting all efforts to extradite him to the U.S. is in line with these new policies.

Julian Assange faces 17 charges under the Espionage Act and one charge for conspiracy to commit computer intrusion. The Espionage Act charges stem from Mr. Assanges role in publishing information about the U.S. State Department, Guantanamo Bay, and wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Much of this information was published by mainstream newspapers, such as the New York Times and Washington Post, who often worked with Mr. Assange and WikiLeaks directly in doing so. Based on the legal logic of this indictment, any of those newspapers could be prosecuted for engaging in these reporting activities. In fact, because what Mr. Assange is accused of doing is legally indistinguishable from what papers like the New York Times do, the Obama administration rightfully declined to bring these charges. The Trump Administration, which brought these charges against Assange, was notably less concerned with press freedom.

The prosecution of Mr. Assange marks the first time in U.S. history that a publisher of truthful information has been indicted under the Espionage Act. The prosecution of Mr. Assange, if successful, not only sets a legal precedent whereby journalists or publishers can be prosecuted, but a political one as well. In the future the New York Times or Washington Post could be prosecuted when they publish important stories based on classified information. Or, just as dangerous for democracy, they may refrain from publishing such stories for fear of prosecution.

Mr. Assange has been detained on remand in London for more than three years, as he awaits the outcome of extradition proceedings against him. In 2021, a U.K. District Judge ruled against extraditing Mr. Assange to the United States on the grounds that doing so would put him at undue risk of suicide. The U.K.s High Court overturned that decision after accepting U.S. assurances regarding the prospective treatment Mr. Assange would receive in prison. Neither ruling adequately addresses the threat the charges against Mr. Assange pose to press freedom. The U.S. Department of Justice can halt these harmful proceedings at any moment by simply dropping the charges against Mr. Assange.

We appreciate your attention to this urgent issue. Every day that the prosecution of Julian Assange continues is another day that our own government needlessly undermines our own moral authority abroad and rolls back the freedom of the press under the First Amendment at home. We urge you to immediately drop these Trump-era charges against Mr. Assange and halt this dangerous prosecution.

Sincerely,Members of Congress

CC: British Embassy; Australian Embassy

See the article here:
Congressional Effort to End Assange Prosecution Underway

Get the latest Syracuse news delivered right to your inbox. Subscribe to our newsletter here.

With headlines and newscasts having covered the career and imprisonment of Julian Assange for years, his brother Gabriel Shipton said he wanted to offer another perspective to this important story.

With this documentary, its really an effort to close that gap and bring people a different side of the story that they might not have heard before and really get to know Julian in a different way, Gabriel said.

On Tuesday night, Gabriel and his father John Shipton brought their documentary, Ithaka: A Fight To Free Julian Assange, to Syracuse University. Over a hundred students, staff and locals gathered in the Joyce Hergenhan Auditorium in the Newhouse School of Public Communications for a screening of the film and a Q&A with the Shiptons.

The documentary follows John, Assanges wife Stella Morris and their campaign to free Assange, an Australian journalist and computer programmer. Assange founded the media organization WikiLeaks, which has released thousands of classified documents from various government and corporate entities since 2006.

In 2010, the site gained national attention when it released a series of leaks implicating the U.S. military in the murder and torture of innocent civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan. The U.S. indicted Assange on 17 counts of violating the Espionage Act in 2019, and he faces a 175-year prison sentence if extradited from the United Kingdom to the U.S.

Freshman broadcast and digital journalism student Gabe Howe said he knew of Assanges story before going to Mondays event, but was intrigued with the chance to hear about it differently.

Its a unique opportunity to get the other side of this, especially with the mans family in the room, Howe said. In my experience that doesnt happen very often.

Gabriel Shipton worked as a producer on the film and stressed that with this documentary, they are really trying to tell a different side of the story. Gabriel said production of the film started in 2019, when John was traveling around the world advocating for Assange. It only seemed natural to document Johns efforts, Gabriel said. Now, the Shiptons are hoping to share the story with others.

We want to hopefully educate students to whats going on here in this unprecedented prosecution, Gabriel said.

After the screening, the Shiptons touched on issues of journalism and freedom of speech during the Q&A. Senior Naomi Weinflash said she went to the event for her Communications Law class and felt that the discussions about these issues really aligned with the curriculum, and added hearing directly from the Shiptons brought the story to life.

Despite the long journey of advocacy the Shiptons have gone through, spanning years, John said that the support hes seen around the world helps him to keep going.

Ive found that people around the world have, within their hearts, a revulsion to injustice and a hunger to see justice, and thats pretty heartening, John said.

The Shiptons both warned of the dangers of criminalizing journalists who exercise their First Amendment right to free speech.

There is no America without free speech. What is it that you have with the constraints on free speech? What are you left with? This is a very serious question, John said.

Published on March 29, 2023 at 12:10 am

View post:
Documentary focusing on Julian Assange and his family showcased at ...

LONDON, Dec 2 (Reuters) - WikiLeaks' founder Julian Assange, who is battling extradition from Britain to the United States where he is wanted on criminal charges, has submitted an appeal to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), the court confirmed on Friday.

Assange, 51, is wanted by U.S. authorities on 18 counts, including one under a spying act, relating to WikiLeaks' release of vast troves of confidential U.S. military records and diplomatic cables which Washington said had put lives in danger.

Britain has given the go-ahead for his extradition, but he has launched an appeal at London's High Court, with the first hearing expected early next year.

His legal team have also launched a case against Britain at the ECHR, which could potentially order the extradition to be blocked.

"We confirm that an application has been received," a statement from the court said.

Stella Assange, his wife, said she hoped the ECHR would not be needed to consider the case and that it could be resolved in Britain. If the case was taken to the ECHR, she said it "would be a sad day and a major disappointment".

Assange's brother Gabriel Shipton told Reuters earlier this week he believed the U.S. authorities would want to avoid the case going before the ECHR, as the European media and public were more sympathetic to his cause than those in Britain or the United States.

"I would imagine the U.S. wants to avoid that... trying to extradite a publisher from Europe for publishing U.S. war revelations when the U.S. is asking Europe to make all sort of sacrifices for the war in Ukraine," Shipton said.

In January 2021, a British judge ruled Australian-born Assange should not be extradited, saying his mental health meant he would be at risk of suicide if convicted and held in a maximum security prison.

But that decision was overturned after an appeal by U.S. authorities who gave a package of assurances, including a pledge he could be transferred to Australia to serve any sentence.

The extradition was then ratified in June by the then British home secretary (interior minister) after the government said the courts had concluded it would not be unjust or an abuse of process, and that he would be treated appropriately.

WikiLeaks first came to prominence in 2010 when it released hundreds of thousands of secret classified files and diplomatic cables in what was the largest security breach of its kind in U.S. military history.

U.S. prosecutors and Western security officials regard Assange as a reckless enemy of the state whose actions imperilled the lives of agents named in the leaked material.

Assange's supporters say he is an anti-establishment hero who has been victimised because he exposed U.S. wrongdoing in conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, and that his prosecution is a politically motivated assault on journalism and free speech.

He spent seven years holed up in Ecuador's embassy in London to avoid extradition to Sweden where he was wanted for questioning over a sexual assault investigation that was later dropped.

However, he was dragged out and jailed in 2019 for breaching bail conditions, and has been held in prison in London ever since while his extradition case is decided.

The case has gained prominence this week with major media outlets that had originally worked with Assange over the leaked material writing an open letter to say his prosecution should end.

Meanwhile, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said he had raised the issue of Assange's release with U.S. officials, saying the matter should be brought to a close.

Additional reporting by Kanishka Singh; editing by Philippa Fletcher and Rosalba O'Brien

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Continue reading here:

Julian Assange appeals to European court over U.S. extradition

From: Fault Lines

Fault Lines examines what Assanges case says about press freedom and the consequences of publishing state secrets.

On this episode of Fault Lines, we look at what Julian Assanges case could mean for press freedom and the consequences hes faced for publishing state secrets.

In 2010, the WikiLeaks founder partnered with other media organisations to publish hundreds of thousands of classified US documents about its wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It remains the largest leak of classified information to date.

He is the only publisher facing charges for releasing this material.

The Australian citizen faces a 175-year sentence and has been indicted under the US Espionage Act for activities journalists engage in every day.

It is the first time the Act has been used against a publisher raising alarm bells among First Amendment advocates. In the meantime, hes being detained in the harshest prison in the UK because of a US extradition request.

Go here to see the original:

The Imprisonment of Julian Assange | Julian Assange | Al Jazeera

The Belmarsh Tribunal convened in Washington D.C. as they pressured the Biden administration to stop the attack on press freedom as they continued the persecution of Julian Assange who is guilty of reporting American war crimes to the world.

The group advocates for imprisoned whistleblowers, journalists, and publishers who give the public reliable information that reveals the crimes that governments wont tell you.

Focusing their meeting addressing the unjust prosecution of which the United States attempt to charge Assange with 18 charges which could bring about a punishment of up to 175 years in prison under the U.S. Espionage Act, for revealing government crimes that stem from war crimes, torture, spying and much more.

The charges linked to the documents most known that his organization leaked (Wikileaks) which have over 391,832 reportsthat relate to the Iraq war logs. Additionally, the reports show military videos displaying the atrocities of the Collateral Murder footage which displays a U.S. military helicopter shooting at 11 civilians, two journalists, and two children involved as well in Baghdad the capital of Iraq.

Now appealing his extradition order once more as he has been confined in Belmarsh high-security prison in London since April 2019. If Julian Assanges extradition comes to pass and is sentenced under the espionage act more than likely a sentence of life imprisonment, every media outlet, source, and publisher around the world will have to consider the dangers of reporting in a world where we see injustice every day from exploitation to police injustice and corruption, they think: if they did that to Assange, what will they do to me?

Jeffery Sterling, a lawyer, former CIA, and now a member of the tribunal,spoke at the event. When examining the Espionage Act and how its being used, its not unreasonable to be reminded of the anti-literacy laws that were enforced during slavery in this country. Those laws were used to prevent educating slaves because of the fear that an educated slave population would threaten the nations security. Keeping us uneducated and ignorant was a tenet of national security then, and we see the same thing with how the Espionage Act is being used now against whistleblowers and against Julian Assange, Jeffery said.

The tribunal also heard from Ben Wizner who has been the main legal adviser to whistleblower Edward Snowden. Wiznersaid, If this prosecution goes forward and ends in a conviction, it will be a very dark day for press freedom in the United States. The prosecution has already had a chilling effect in newsrooms around the country. The lawyers for publications are already assessing the risks of publishing certain information in a way that they never had before.

The U.S. seems to feel threatened by Assange and his willingness to reveal the truth to the public and keep the government accountable. This seems to me that the government is desperate and will do absolutely anything possible to make an example out of Julian Assange for revealing their crimes. This would send a strong message to anyone who reveals secrets or stories about anyone in a position of authority which sets a harmful precedent for free press around the world. It amazes me how government officials give little to no awareness of this issue putting an innocent man through such suffering for telling the truth.

If we want a functioning democracy and the 1st amendment Julian Assange needs to be free.

Related

Read more:

Opinion: U.S. attack on Julian Assange and the truth

Julian Assange is a world-renowned and controversial figure thanks to his activism concerning politics, promotion of free speech, and a long-running extradition saga.

Assange is incarcerated in His Majestys Prison Belmarsh, a category A prison, in London, England. The United States is currently seeking Assanges extradition.

What did Julian Assange do to the United States?

Julian Assange has been indicted on 17 charges of espionage and one charge of computer misuse over the publication of thousands of military and diplomatic documents on Wikileaks that whistleblower Chelsea Manning leaked.

Despite being well-known globally, many are unaware of Assanges personal history.

Born on July 3rd, 1971, in Queensland, Australia, Julian Paul Hawkins entered the world and, unfortunately, into a broken family. His parents, Christine Ann Hawkins and John Shipton, had separated before his birth.

However, his mother was quickly remarried to a man named Brett Assange. Julian would consider this man his father and legally change his last name to reflect that.

Christines relationship troubles didnt end there. She divorced again and became involved with a man that Assange would later describe as a member of an Australian cult.

This resulted in a very transient and nomadic childhood for Assange who would live in more than thirty different Australian towns before his mid-teens.

A troubled home life and sporadic schooling did not dull Assanges intellect. He excelled in the fields of physics, computer programming, and mathematics.

He studied at the University of Melbourne but did not complete his degree as he had already begun his descent into illegal activity distracting him from his schooling.

Assange was only sixteen in 1987 when he began hacking under the name Mendax. He allegedly hacked into highly classified systems, including NASA and the Pentagon.

Within a few years, in 1991, he was discovered hacking into Nortel a Canadian multinational telecommunications corporation with offices in Melbourne.

Within three years, Assange was facing over thirty charges regarding hacking and related crimes. In 1996, he pled guilty to twenty-four of these charges, with the others being dropped.

He was ordered to pay reparation fees for his crimes and was released on a good behavior bond. The presiding judge took pity on Assange for his upbringing and noted a lack of malicious behavior.

Most would take this as an opportunity to make a fresh start and abstain from any illegal activity, but not Assange. This brush with the criminal justice system did not deter him. In fact, it pushed him toward his next venture founding WikiLeaks.

Established in 2006, WikiLeaks was originally conceptualized to mimic the effects of Daniel Ellsbergs release of the infamous Pentagon Papers. Assange desperately wanted WikiLeaks to become a shortcut between political or classified information leaks and the coverage offered by media outlets.

Despite the company being established in Australia, its servers were quickly moved to countries like Sweden, where Assange knew there was greater legal protection for media sources.

The purpose of WikiLeaks was simple in Assanges mind, to bring any important information or news to the public with accurate and applicable sources to ensure the reputability of the content.

Join the thousands of fellow patriots who rely on our 5-minute newsletter to stay informed on the key events and trends that shaped our nation's past and continue to shape its present.

However, Assange used WikiLeaks to upload any content he deemed worthy of the public eye, including classified and protected information.

WikiLeaks began making international headlines in 2010 after thousands of highly classified documents were published. A United States army intelligence specialist and analyst, Chelsea Manning, provided this series of leaks.

The published information contained intelligence relating to the war in Afghanistan and field reports from the war in Iraq.

After this occurred and WikiLeaks became the focal point of international attention, it was clear that the company had published hundreds of thousands of diplomatic cables, which provided highlights and intel to nearly three hundred United States embassies worldwide. This would become known as Cablegate.

WikiLeaks would publish further classified information regarding the United States. In April 2011, the Guantanamo Bay file leak took the world by storm.

This leak highlighted hundreds of classified reports on detainees, past and current, that had been held at the United States detention camp in Cuba. It revealed disturbing amounts of coerced confessions, many from mentally disabled individuals and even children.

The flow of information would be constant, as Assange had always wanted. There was even more classified intelligence on the Syria Files, Kissinger Cables, United States National Archives, Saudi Arabian documents, and the Yemen Files.

Such leaks only enhanced the case the United States Government was building against Assange.

After the initial release of the Chelsea Manning material, the United States authorities had immediately begun investigating WikiLeaks and Assange hoping to prosecute him under the Espionage Act.

This was only further amplified during the Chelsea Manning trial when the existence of chat logs between an international interlocutor (Assange) was brought to light. There was also a warrant for Assanges arrest in Sweden, where he was wanted for charges of sexual assault.

In 2012, fearing extradition to the United States, Assange went to the Ecuadorian Embassy in London and applied for political asylum, which he was granted.

Assange remained in the Embassy until 2019, when his asylum was finally revoked, and the London Metropolitan Police subsequently arrested him.

Following his arrest and imprisonment, a United States indictment was made public, initially charging Mr Assange with conspiracy to commit computer intrusion and charges related to his involvement with Chelsea Manning.

However, since the initial charges, a United States grand jury has added charges related to espionage, all of which could result in a prison sentence of up to one hundred and seventy-five years.

For the last number of years, the United States has made extradition request after extradition request. All the while, Julian Assanges lawyers have strived to halt it.

In the summer of 2022, the United Kingdoms High Court ruled that Assange could be extradited, and then-UK Home Secretary Priti Patel gave her stamp of approval.

However, this has yet to occur as Assange appealed the extradition order of the British authorities on July 1st, 2022.

Despite Mr Julian Assanges obvious crimes against the United States, his supporters contend that he should not be extradited.

The argument in his favor relates to his right to free speech and the freedom of the press. Many view Assange as an activist and laud his investigative journalism. He is seen as a journalist who has exemplified the phrase dont shoot the messenger.

Originally posted here:

What Did Julian Assange Do to the United States?

Julian Assange supporters are urging Anthony Albanese to grasp a crucial opportunity to secure his release in a litmus test for democracy.

A public artwork of Assange and whistleblowersEdward Snowden and Chelsea Manning was unveiled in Sydney on Friday.

Speaking at the event,former journalist Dean Yates pleaded with the prime minister to lobby on behalf of the detained Australian during an upcoming meeting with Joe Biden and Britains Rishi Sunak.

Time is running out, he told AAP, arguing the upcoming US election cycle would shatter any chance of a favourable resolution.

There is a growing sense amongst Australians that enoughs enough Albanese said that himself.

Its time for him to use his personal relationship with President Biden and bring Julian home.

Mr Yates was running Reuters Baghdad bureau when two of his reporters, Namir Noor-Eldeen and Saeed Chmagh, were killed in a US air strike.

The circumstances of their deaths were suppressed by the US military until Assange published a video of the attack on his WikiLeaks website, leading to his arrest.

Mr Yates said publication of the Iraq War Logs, as they came to be known, ensured the pairs deaths were not forgotten, even though those responsible were never held accountable.

What Julian did was expose the lies and the war crimes that were committed in Iraq and the hypocrisy is that he is the one being prosecuted and persecuted, he said.

Assanges father, John Shipton, said his sons incarceration was excoriating and scarring for him and his family.

After 14 years, you no longer use the term hope, he said.

But he is buoyed by growing public support for Assange, with voices from all sides of politics converging to plead for his release.

The incoming tide is now turning into a tsunami of support, he said, channelling Bob Dylan.

You dont need to be a weatherman to see which way the winds blowing.

Mr Shipton said Australia, the US and the UK must end Assanges prosecution as a moral imperative in order to maintain soft power on the world stage.

The circumstances of Julians persecution are an abrogation of human rights, conventions of asylum and a dereliction of due process, he said.

That circumstance must change.

Mr Yates said it would be a massive setback for public interest journalism and government accountability if Assange was extradited to the US.

The publication of the Iraq and Afghan War logs frightened the hell out of governments and that has resulted in a tightening around the world on whistleblowers and journalists around the publication of material that is in the public interest, he said.

People need to look at this case of Julian Assange as a litmus test.

See the original post here:

Time is running out: PM urged to stand up for Assange

Carey Shenkman, attorney, author, and litigator specializing in civil and human rights, joins Robert Scheer for this weeks Scheer Intelligence, where Shenkman offers a sobering analysis on one of the most chilling attacks on press freedom exhibited in the Julian Assange case. Using his recently published book, A Century of Repression: The Espionage Act and Freedom of the Press, Shenkmen details the history of the Espionage Act and how civil liberties have continued to be eroded as a result of the existence of this law and the lack of revision.

Shenkman talks about the bipartisan disdain towards the Espionage Act in legal circles yet its continued use by bipartisan presidents brings the conversation to its flaws and disreputability: Over the decades, you have folks that are coming out with law review articles saying that it's vague, verbose, that it makes no sense, and that ambiguity in the law is being exploited now to go after Julian Assange, to go after government whistleblowers. So there have actually been serious calls for its reform and repeal in recent years. Assange faces 175 years in a U.S. maximum security prison after being indicted with 17 charges relating to the Espionage Act.

Going back to its inception during World War I, Shenkman explains what its true purpose was and how within the law, you get a sense that this language of promoting disloyalty, of promoting opposition to the war, was actually used to go after conscientious objectors and folks that opposed entry into World War I.

As for Julian Assange, the urgency behind bringing attention to the case is justified. According to Shenkman, We tried to dig through the history to see if a publisher has ever been charged for anything like Julian Assange has been accused of. And the answer is no. This is the first case in U.S. history of its kind. And it would set a precedent that would open the floodgates for prosecuting the press.

Shenkman says if Assange is extradited, it will make his case a law school case for all the wrong reasons. Despite all the concern surrounding the overreaching power of the United States, this case could also open the door to countries around the world to extradite citizens from foreign countries for exposing their wrongdoings. As Shenkman mentions, Assange is not a U.S. government employee. He's not even a U.S. citizen. And somehow the U.S. government says it has jurisdiction.

More:
The Nightmare Espionage Act That is Killing Julian Assange and the ...

On February 7, Seymour Hersh arguably the most credible investigative journalist of our era published a bombshell expos revealing that the United States was guilty of blowing up the Nord Stream II undersea pipeline that was supposed to deliver natural gas from Russia to the Federal Republic of Germany.

Hershs revelations were based entirely on classified information leaked to him by a member of the government with first-hand knowledge of the planning and implementation of the attack on the pipeline a member of the government who clearly broke the law by violating his fiduciary duty not to reveal classified information to an unauthorized source.

Like Chelsea Manning, who had revealed classified information to Julian Assange, for which she was convicted and sentenced to 35 years in prison, Hershs source, if identified, would surely also be convicted and sentenced to similar long-term imprisonment.

But Hershs source has not been identified. However Hersh himself has. According to the same logic under which Assange was indicted for publishing classified information, and now faces up to 175 years in prison, Hersh, too, should be indicted and face comparable long-term imprisonment.

So why is Sy Hersh still free?

Hersh broke the same laws that the U.S. government accuses Julian Assange of breaking. But unlike Assange, a foreigner whom the U.S. has unsuccessfully been trying to extradite from England for years, Hersh is an American citizen living right here in the United States easy to find, cuff, indict, convict and throw in prison for the rest of his life.

So why is Sy Hersh still free?

Surely the classified information that Hersh has revealed is even more dangerous to the safety of the U.S. than what Assange revealed. Hersh showed that the U.S. had committed an unprovoked act of war against Russia. This gives Russia an absolute legal right to retaliate under Chapter VII, Article 51, of the United Nations Charter, which cites self-defense as an exception to the prohibition against the use of force.

Since Russia happens to be a nuclear power, its potential retaliation could trigger World War III and wipe out not just the U.S. but the entire human race. Therefore, in any comparison of who has placed the U.S. in greater danger Julian Assange is a piker compared to Sy Hersh.

So why is Sy Hersh still free?

The answer is this. Although President Joe Biden, Secretary of State Anthony Blinken and Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Victoria Nuland would love to throw Sy Hersh into a maximum security prison for the rest of his life, as punishment for revealing their complicity in blowing up the Nord Stream II pipelines they dont dare to. If they did, it would be tantamount to admitting that what Hersh published is true.

Which would be embarrassing, to say the least, because Biden and Company have spent every day since February 7 denying that Hershs revelations are true. In other words, they claim he made it all up which means, according to them, that he did not publish classified information. Therefore he cannot be guilty of any crime.

Thats the frustrating double bind in which Biden now finds himself. It must drive him crazy. Because the day he sends federal agents to put the cuffs on Sy Hersh, that is the day he and Blinken and Nuland will have to admit that they lied, that Hershs expos is true, and that they did indeed order the destruction of the Nord stream pipelines.

So of course that day will never come, and Sy Hersh will remain a free man. Which is why, at least this one time, I am glad that our leaders are liars.

Read more:
Why is Assange in Jail and Not Seymour Hersh?